Jesse W. Johnson

A Comparison of Constant Time Delay and Simultaneous Prompting Within Embedded Instruction in General Education Classes with Students with Moderate to Severe Disabilities

An adapted alternating treatment design was used to measure the effectiveness of constant time delay and simultaneous prompting procedures within an embedded instruction format on the acquisition of academic skills. Four middle school students with moderate to severe disabilities and the paraprofessionals who supported these students in their general education classes participated in the study. The results of the study indicated that both procedures were effective in promoting the acquisition of the target skills. However, the constant time delay procedure was more effective for two of the students and the simultaneous prompting procedure was more effective for the remaining students. Results are discussed in terms of future research and implications for supporting the inclusion of students with moderate and severe disabilities in general education classes.

Using an iPod Touch to Teach Social and Self-Management Skills to an Elementary Student with Emotional/Behavioral Disorders

A ten year-old boy exhibiting frequent off-task and disruptive behavior during small group math instruction was taught to use an iPod Touch for video modeling and self-monitoring purposes. A single-subject changing conditions (A-B-BC) design was used to investigate the differential effects of video modeling versus a combination of video modeling and self-monitoring. During the first intervention phase, immediately prior to participating in a math group, the student viewed a 3-minute video in which peers modeled appropriate math group behavior. Video modeling resulted in a significant increase in on-task behavior and decrease in disruptive behavior. However, results showed variability across sessions. For the second intervention phase, the student was taught to self-monitor his behavior during math group. A combination of video modeling and self-monitoring then resulted in a consistent increase in percent of intervals on-task (near 100%), as well as consistently low levels of targeted disruptive behavior.

The Efficacy of Embedded Instruction for Students with Developmental Disabilities Enrolled in General Education Classes.

A multiple baseline across behaviors design was used to evaluate the efficacy of embedded instruction with 3 students with developmental disabilities who were enrolled in general education classes. Two general education teachers and 1 paraprofessional delivered embedded instruction to students during regularly scheduled instructional activities. The skills taught to students included answering probe questions drawn from the general science curriculum, identifying functional sight-words drawn from the general reading curriculum, and making requests using an electronic communication device. Student data showed that embedded instruction was effective with all 3 students. The results also indicate that both general education teachers and paraprofessionals were able to implement the procedure with a high degree of fidelity without disrupting the ongoing instructional activities of the general education classes. Teacher ratings of the acceptability and perceived effectiveness of the procedures suggested that teachers viewed embedded instruction as a practical, effective, and efficient strategy for teaching students with developmental disabilities in general education settings.

A Comparison of One-to-One Embedded Instruction in the General Education Classroom and One-to-One Massed Practice Instruction in the Special Education Classroom

A single subject alternating treatment design was used to compare the relative effectiveness of one-to-one embedded instruction in the general education classroom and one-to-one massed practice instruction in a special education class. Four middle school students with developmental disabilities, their special education teacher, and paraprofessional participated in the study. The results indicate that embedded instruction is an effective instructional strategy for students with developmental disabilities being served in inclusive settings. However, the results indicate that there was some difference in the efficiency of the two instructional formats. Two students reached criterion more rapidly in the one-to-one massed instructional intervention while the one-to-one embedded instruction was more efficient for one student. There was no difference between the interventions for the fourth student. Finally, the study validated previous research that found that both special education teachers and paraprofessionals can, with minimal training, accurately implement embedded instructional interventions in the general education classroom. Implications for practitioners and researchers are discussed.

A Comparison of Two Trial Distribution Schedules in Embedded Instruction.

We compared the effectiveness of tWo trial distribution schedules implemented in an embedded instruction package to teach academic skills to students With developmental disabilities in general education classes. In the first package, instructional trials Were distributed across a 30-min time period that reflected the typical length of a lesson in the content area (e.g., math or reading). In the second package, instructional trials Were distributed across a 120-min time period that cut across at least tWo lessons (e.g., math and reading). General education teachers provided instruction to students under both trial distribution conditions. The results indicated that both schedules lead to the acquisition of the target skills. In addition, students Were able to generalize their performance to natural stimuli found in general education classes. HoWever, the 30-min trial distribution schedule resulted in faster acquisition of the skills for tWo of the students. There Were no substantial differences in the rates of acquisition under the tWo schedules for the other tWo students. Results are discussed in terms of future research and implications for supporting the inclusion of students With developmental disabilities in general education classes.

Discrimination training: a comparison of two procedures for presenting multiple examples within a fading and non-fading paradigm.

When teaching discriminations, many researchers and practitioners recommend presenting multiple examples of both the correct and incorrect stimuli. To test this suggestion, we compared two procedures for presenting multiple examples. In one, multiple examples across trials (ME, Across), one correct (S+) and one incorrect (S-) stimulus were presented each trial; examples then changed across trials. In another procedure, multiple examples within trials (ME, Within), three stimuli (either 2 S+s and 1 S-, or 1 S+ and 2 S-s) were presented each trial; examples again changed across trials. Two experiments were conducted to test these procedures. The first procedure used a non-fading program to teach discrimination; the second used a fading procedure. In the first experiment, we taught 10 persons to identify words under these two procedures. The former procedure was superior in acquisition; the latter procedure, however, was better under generalization for most participants. In the second experiment, we presented the two procedures within a fading paradigm. The results replicated those in Experiment 1: ME, Across was better for acquisition, but ME, Within was better for generalization. Results were discussed and follow-up studies suggested.

Preparing Teachers and Consultants for the Challenge of Severe Problem Behavior

Student behavior and violence in schools has rapidly become an area of critical local and national concern in recent years. Teachers and schools are expected to cope with increasing student diversity along many dimensions, including cognitive and intellectual functioning, ethnic and linguistic background, and problem behaviors. School personnel will need expertise in effectively supporting teachers and other practitioners working with students with different labels and challenges (developmental disabilities, emotional/behavioral disorders) and be able to work at multiple levels (classroom, school, community). This article describes the comprehensive behavior specialist (CBS) program, which is aimed at developing such expertise among teachers and other practitioners within school and community systems. The rationale, basic content, and organization of the program are described. Positive evaluation data are presented from two cohorts of school personnel who have experienced the program.

A Brief Description of Functional Assessment Procedures Reported in JASH (1983-1999).

The seminal article by Iwata, Dorsey, Slifer, Bauman, and Richman (1994/1982; Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 197–209. Reprinted from Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 2, 3–20, 1982) is credited with sparking a resurgence of clinical and research attention to functional assessment and analysis procedures, which have now become an expected professional standard and practice in situations involving problem behaviors. TASH and JASH have played a substantial role over the years in promoting positive behavioral support approaches that include functional assessment as a critical foundational component. To provide a historical context for this special issue, this article briefly describes the prevalence of different types of functional assessment and analysis procedures reported in articles in JASH involving individuals exhibiting problem behaviors.

Effects on stereotypy and other challenging behavior of matching rates of instruction to free-operant rates of responding

Research has shown that when individuals are in situations that do not occasion one form of motoric responding, they will engage in another so that the overall level of motoric responding is homeostatic. The purpose of this study was to test whether students would substitute task-related behaviors for stereotypic or other challenging behaviors when the opportunity for active responding did or did not match the level of motoric responding in a free-operant baseline. Four students with mental retardation participated. Results showed that they did substitute behaviors, with stereotypic and other challenging behaviors occurring 1.5-14 times as much in the Non-matched condition for the four students. Further analysis showed considerably more of these behaviors in passive than in active tasks (by a factor up to 21 times as much). Results were discussed in terms of homeostasis, functional assessment, and opportunities to improve educational behaviors.

A comparison of multiple versus single examples of the correct stimulus on task acquisition and generalization by persons with developmental disabilities

In teaching discriminations to persons with retardation, we often presume we will improve acquisition and generalization if we use multiple examples of boththe correct and incorrect stimuli. Two experiments were conducted to test this hypothesis. In the first experiment, 7 persons with moderate retardation learned to discriminate between functional words under two conditions. In one condition, Multiple Example of S- Only,1 example of the correct stimulus (S+) and 10 examples of the incorrect stimulus (S-) were used during acquisition. In the other condition, Multiple Examples of S+ and S-,10 examples of the S+ and 10 examples of the S- were used. Results showed that the condition which presented only a single example of S+ was superior 16 times and inferior 4 times during acquisition, generalization, and maintenance. A second experiment was conducted to (a) replicate the methodology and procedures in Experiment 1 with different participants, (b) determine whether the results were replicable, and (c) obtain efficiency data. Results replicated the findings of the first experiment. The condition which presented only a single example of S+ was superior on measures of (a) trials to criterion, (b) percent correct during acquisition, and (c) minutes to criterion. On measures of generalization, the two conditions were relatively equal. Thus, the condition which presented only a single example of the correct stimulus was more efficient and was just as effective in generalization as the condition which presented multiple examples of both the S+ and S-. These surprising results were discussed in terms of stimulus control, why students performed just as well during generalization when only one example of the S+ was used, why acquisition was also poorer for this condition, and how future studies might address these points.